Majority
—In an action, inter alia, for a judgment declaring that the defendant has a duty to defend and indemnify the plaintiff in an action entitled Bell v 77 Realty Corp., pending in the Supreme Court, Kings County, under Index No. 166591/94, the defendant appeals from an order and judgment (one paper) of the Supreme Court, Kangs County (Carson, J.), dated March 4, 1998, which denied its motion for summary judgment, granted the plaintiffs cross motion for summary judgment, and declared that the defendant has a duty to defend and indemnify the plaintiff in the action entitled Bell v 77 Realty Corp.
Ordered that the order and judgment is reversed, on the law, with costs, the motion is granted, the cross motion is denied, and it is declared that the defendant has no duty to defend and indemnify the plaintiff in the action entitled Bell v 77 Realty Corp. (supra).
Cases cited
- Argentina v. Otsego Mutual Fire Insurance 86 NY2d 748 p. 457
- Security Mutual Insurance v. Acker-Fitzsimons Corp. 31 NY2d 436 p. 457
- Vradenburg v. Prudential Property & Casualty Insurance 212 AD2d 913 p. 457
- Herold v. East Coast Scaffolding, Inc. 208 AD2d 592 p. 457
- D'Aloia v. Travelers Insurance 85 NY2d 825 p. 457